[LRflex] Re: A Lesson Learned...
- From: "wildlightphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <wildlightphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, leica@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:17:37 -0400
David Young <dsy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So, a word to the wise... if you're going to do "dangerous work"....
> use a filter ... no matter what the anti-filter folks will tell you!
As a non-filter user I'd be the last to recommend a blanket "don't use a
protective filter" in all circumstances. Certain conditions warrant added
protection, like blowing sand, salt spray, etc., much as I'd use a rope
when rock climbing or carry a parka in stormy weather. I don't carry a
parka around Sacramento in the summer, nor do I carry a rope on my bus
commute to work.
I question whether the lens would have been protected by a filter from a
stone flying at a velocity sufficient to chip the front element. This
stone could have just as easily broken the filter, projecting multiple
shards of glass toward the lens, and the filter is a bigger target than the
front element for the stone to hit. Only controlled tests sacrificing
multiple filters and lenses can determine if the filter would in this case
have protected the lens.
Leica does include a protective plate on the front of some lenses where a
particularly expensive lens element is right up front, the 280mm f/4 APO
for example. A few years ago when I accidentally dropped my 280 f/4, the
protective glass plate was undamaged, but the expensive low-dispersion
front element was chipped. Go figure.
Doug Herr
Birdman of Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com ? Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft®
Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
